Hello
I delete a file with Windows Explorer that was part of the repository
and had been checked out.
Now, when I run fossil commit, I get the following error message:
=
D:\fossil commit
C:\fossil.exe: missing file: a8711407.txt
C:\fossil.exe: aborting due to prior errors
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 4:50 AM, altufa...@mail.com wrote:
It is more like a logical process. You want to work on something, create a
branch, work on it and commit. If you have to create a branch when
committing, you will have to remember if this is first commit in that branch
or subsequent.
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 08:51:42AM +0200, Gilles wrote:
I delete a file with Windows Explorer that was part of the repository
and had been checked out.
Now, when I run fossil commit, I get the following error message:
=
D:\fossil commit
C:\fossil.exe: missing file:
On 9 Aug 2011, at 22:14, Martin S. Weber wrote:
So I wanted to use javadoc/scaladoc style documentation and take advantage of
fossils embedded documentation -- I put the scaladoc under repo/docco and
happily was going to http://server:port/repo/doc/trunk/docco/index.html - but
there
On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 11:11:03 +0400, Konstantin Khomoutov
flatw...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
I suspect the file was located in some subdirectory and you tried to
`rm` it while being in some other place of the directory structure.
Right on. I could successfuly remove the two files. I'll check
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Ben Summers b...@fluffy.co.uk wrote:
It sounds like the default should change, and those who really care should
adjust their web server.
Just FYI: the vast majority of users do not have admin-level rights to their
publicly-hosted servers. i.e. fossil changes
On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 10:31:56 +0200
Gilles gilles.gana...@free.fr wrote:
[...]
At this point, fossil ls lists two files that are apparently part of
the checkout, but running fossil commit or fossil ci simply says
nothing has changed. How can I commit those two files?
Apparently, you're
On 10 Aug 2011, at 15:11, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Ben Summers b...@fluffy.co.uk wrote:
It sounds like the default should change, and those who really care should
adjust their web server.
Just FYI: the vast majority of users do not have admin-level rights to
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Ben Summers b...@fluffy.co.uk wrote:
Yes, that was why I suggested changing the default to something which
caused minimal problems. The paranoid will probably be running their own
servers anyway.
In any case, the DENY setting only affected those doing
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
Sorry, i didn't mean to imply that such a change _would_ break my setup (i
had never even heard of that header until this thread!)
And a side note: HTML5 deprecates frames altogether (but not iframe), by the
way.
--
Without using the batch files, I've done everything you have by hand using
fossil 1.19 2011 07 22. When I go back to the server, and write fossil open
ops, I correctly get the client1.txt file on the server side. Therefore, it
is either a windows XP vs. 7 issue, or a fossil vs. 1.18 vs 1.19 issue.
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Gé Weijers g...@weijers.org wrote:
If you create the branch first you cannot forget later and commit to the
wrong branch.
I beg to differ! Just this past Friday, I did three separate commits to
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com wrote:
$ fossil branch next espresso-feature
That's an interesting feature request. I'll take it under
consideration...
What about allowing a null commit on branch? That way,
fossil commit -branch new-branch
On Aug 9, 2011, at 7:58 AM, Richard Hipp wrote:
Change the subject: Please help me to understand why people want to create a
new branch before adding changes to that branch, rather than just waiting
until they check-in their edits? I'm not being sarcastic or critical here.
A lot of
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:35 AM, Will Duquette w...@wjduquette.com wrote:
...development context. If I create the new branch explicitly, then I've
changed my development context in my head AND in my work area.
Thank you for so elegantly describing what i was unable to express nearly as
well
On 11/08/2011, at 8:02 AM, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:35 AM, Will Duquette w...@wjduquette.com wrote:
...development context. If I create the new branch explicitly, then I've
changed my development context in my head AND in my work area.
Thank you for so elegantly
16 matches
Mail list logo
